Summary
An application to appoint a commissioner and work out a preliminary partition decree was not barred by limitation despite thirty years’ passage. The partition suit continues until final decree; the application reminds the court to complete that pending process. The alleged intervening compromise and satisfaction of the preliminary decree were not established.
Issues
- Whether limitation barred steps to obtain a final partition decree.
Held
- A preliminary decree crystallizes shares but leaves adjustment and actual partition for final proceedings. The suit remains pending, and no limitation governs the request for commissioner appointment to complete it. (¶ 4–7)
- An actual agreed partition could remove the need for final proceedings, but no such working out of rights or compromise was proved here. (¶ 8)
Result
Appeal dismissed without costs; final decree to be drawn in accordance with law.